OceanRain 2,845 Posted February 27, 2011 Share Posted February 27, 2011 for both those stats to be true they would have needed to have hat 100% posetion in the second half. not bad us getting 2 goals considering. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rfcfraserrfc 262 Posted February 27, 2011 Share Posted February 27, 2011 same on SSN Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaitlinRx 12 Posted February 27, 2011 Share Posted February 27, 2011 They have probably got it mixed the wrong way round, 67% will be correct but it will be for Rangers.Thats what I thought too ! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunslinger 270 Posted February 27, 2011 Share Posted February 27, 2011 i did the math. its actually imposible but its not far off if they had 100% second half. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeBlue 136 Posted February 27, 2011 Share Posted February 27, 2011 If they had 100% possession in the second half they would have had 65% for the whole game, assuming 30% of first half. I would have said they had a little under 50% in the second half Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nemisis 358 Posted February 27, 2011 Share Posted February 27, 2011 BBC Broadcating By Catholics Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smile 26,622 Posted February 27, 2011 Share Posted February 27, 2011 Second half they had more of the ball first half they stayed in their own half. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
4MenHadADream 122 Posted February 28, 2011 Share Posted February 28, 2011 BBC Scotland Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRITNEY IS NOT FEELING IT 8,293 Posted February 28, 2011 Share Posted February 28, 2011 Aye so it was , I heard radio Scotland say our attendance was 33k on the way home from the match today , there was no chance of almost 20k empty seats ffs Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthernLights 2,526 Posted February 28, 2011 Share Posted February 28, 2011 Don't understand how it's impossible. Surely it's done on number of touches over the whole game?So if we had 100 in the first half and they had 0, yet they had 900 in the second and we had 0, surely they would still have had 90% of possession? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunslinger 270 Posted February 28, 2011 Share Posted February 28, 2011 Don't understand how it's impossible. Surely it's done on number of touches over the whole game?So if we had 100 in the first half and they had 0, yet they had 900 in the second and we had 0, surely they would still have had 90% of possession?its done by time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johngossa 9 Posted February 28, 2011 Share Posted February 28, 2011 My maths isn't great, but I don't thinks possible for them to have 67% overall if they only had 30% halfway through.it is possible but they would have to of kept the ball all second half to have 2 thirds of overall % Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nemisis 358 Posted February 28, 2011 Share Posted February 28, 2011 it is possible but they would have to of kept the ball all second half to have 2 thirds of overall %Most things are possible but it didn't happen. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fitfinlay 0 Posted February 28, 2011 Share Posted February 28, 2011 It would mean second half possession would have to be around 90% saints 10% Rangers to make that swing. Something isnae right anyway!almost bang on tommy30% of 45mins = 13.5mins possesson for st.j first half67% of 90min = 60mins possession for st.j over course of game60mins-13.5mins= st.j had the ball for 46.5mins of the second halfConclusion= some inbread taig fuck from the bbc did the maths! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johngossa 9 Posted February 28, 2011 Share Posted February 28, 2011 Most things are possible but it didn't happen.a na it didnt a was quoting someone who thought it wasnt mate Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nemisis 358 Posted February 28, 2011 Share Posted February 28, 2011 a na it didnt a was quoting someone who thought it wasnt mateI'm sorry but I only speak english. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts